Is there an easy way for retailers to increase sales of their merchandise and also charge more for what they’re selling? Now, a study by researchers at Ohio State University has shown that allowing shoppers to physically touch items can lead to greater sales.

In the study, researchers gathered a large group of college students and allowed them to inspect a regular coffee mug for either 10 or 30 seconds. Next, the students were placed in either an open or closed auction and allowed to bid on the mug that they had just handled. Each student was given $10 to participant in the study and, if they chose, to spend a portion, or all of it, on bids for the auction. Interestingly, the price of the mug (about $4) and the location of where it could be bought (at a nearby bookstore) was disclosed to each participant before bidding began.

What researchers found was that students who handled the mug for 30 seconds paid almost 50% more for it than the 10 second group. In addition, participants in the open auction paid over 15% more for the mug than bidders in the closed auction.

Using psychology as their framework, the researchers explained the outcome of their study through attachment theory, which states that people become attached to objects after becoming become familiar with them. In this study, the physical touching of the coffee mug appeared to strengthen this attachment. Additionally, some student’s motivation to bid higher for the mug may also be explained through loss aversion, a powerful motivator that prompts a strong reaction when there’s an impending sense of loss. The open auctions seemed to exploit this phenomenon.

How do these findings apply to the retail space?

The knowledge of attachment theory and loss aversion can be used by either the shopper or vendor during marketplace transactions. Shoppers can make smarter decisions by being aware of their feelings of attachment, and realizing that such emotions might over-power their usual rational judgment. On the other hand, those working in retail positions, such as retail management, might use this information to setup their shops so that customers are allowed physical contact with the items for sale. This might involve removing products from their packaging, setting up demo kiosks, or encouraging shoppers to trial an item at home.

In conclusion of their study, the researchers note that the application of attachment theory in the retail space has been successfully used for decades. In such industries as car sales, offering a test drive or trial ownership period is a common way to clinch the deal. But the findings from this study are surprising in that participants became attached to an object, of relative insignificance, in a short period of time. Notably, in a few of the auctions the mugs sold for the maximum $10 bid price, even though participants were told that the mug could be bought cheaper from a nearby bookstore.

The implications of this study could shape how retailers optimize their stores, such as by increasing physical contact between products and customers. Additionally, by presenting items for sale in seemingly limited quantities, retailers can trigger a loss aversion type behavior. Online retailers might also use this information to implement more lenient return policies, as trial periods are more likely to convert into sales.

Despite shoppers living in an age of information, where products and prices can be compared in realtime on computers and cellphones, it seems that the control center of making such decisions still lies in the heart, which often betrays us. As they say, caveat emptor!

A forensic psychology lab in Canada has conducted research on how liars can be detected by observing changes in their facial expression.

Lying, of course, is something everyone does on a daily basis, often to ease social tension. But in the world of business, politics and especially law enforcement, deception plays a much higher stakes game.

Police and other law enforcement workers commonly rely on non-standardized interviewing techniques to detect deception in their suspects, but such methods are seen as more of an art than a science. Recently, a research team led by Dr. Porter from Dalhousie University have analyzed thousands of frames of video footage to systematically nail down the tell tail signs of a liar.

Enlisting a group of adult participants, the research team decided to test if the four universal emotions – fear, happiness, sadness and disgust – could be faked. For instance, if the participants were shown a photo of puppies playing, they might be asked to act fearful instead of happy.

After almost 700 video clips were analyzed frame-by-frame, the researchers concluded that not one participant could falsify emotions perfectly. When asked to be deceptive, participants exhibited a higher rate of non-corresponding expressions, with fear and disgust being hardest to fake.

Microexpressions, or true expressions that would only appear for a fraction of a second when participants were lying, allowed researchers to guess if participants were being dishonest. The researchers describe this phenomenon as a true expression ‘cracking’ a deceptive one; however, such flashes of honesty were often contained to just the upper or lower portions of the face making detection difficult. The researchers concluded that a series of tests, such as a scripted flow of questions during a police interview, would be needed to accurately detect lying in suspects.

The mechanism behind microexpressions lies in the complexity of the human face and the motor neurons that control its muscular expressions. Unlike muscles in the limbs and torso, facial muscles are not always under conscious control when we want them to be, thus making it impossible to fake an expression 100% of the time.

The researchers of this study are now pouring over highly publicized cases of lying to observe microexpressions in real life situations. Such research could help fine tune detection methods used by law enforcement and forensic science professionals.

In the first controlled study of a Paleolithic diet in humans, researchers from Lund University in Sweden have shown remarkable health benefits in type 2 diabetic patients who undertook a ‘caveman’ diet for a period of 12 weeks.

Background Info

The biology of our digestive system was set hundreds of thousands of years ago, long before the agrarian revolution and the arrival of modern foods. It is logical then to assume that our ancestor’s choice of foods, such as root vegetables, fruits, nuts and lean meats is probably the safest and most suitable for our body’s needs. Conversely, the foods that we only started eating relatively late in our species existence, such as dairy products and refined sugars and fats could be prime suspects as possible health risks when consumed regularly.

Method and Results

Spurred by the knowledge that some populations around the world, that have no access to modern agrarian-based foods, have virtually no occurrences of diabetes or cardiovascular disease, the Swedish team decided to test the stone age diet with a group of type 2 diabetics and glucose intolerant participants.

These participants were fed a Paleolithic diet for three months, with a comparison group following a Mediterranean diet – eating whole grains, prunes and other foods generally considered to be healthy. At the end of the study, only the stone age group showed remarkable improvements to their blood glucose level. In fact, participants from the Paleolithic group showed normal blood glucose levels after a carbohydrate intake, with a 26% average drop in their response before and after the study.

Noting similarities between the groups, including weight change and caloric intake, the researchers concluded that something else was responsible for the dramatic improvement in carbohydrate response in the Paleolithic group. The evidence points to specific food difference between the groups. The stone age eaters had a lower intake of grains and dairy products; it has been suspected that such a diet can improve the metabolism of carbs and fats, and these findings help bolster this theory.

Conclusion

It seems that we as humans cannot escape our evolutionary lineage. With an ever-increasing amount food choices at our restaurants and food markets, choosing what foods to eat for better health has never been so confusing. Fortunately, the researchers of this study give some advice: it is better to limit our consumption of modern foods than to start counting calories and monitoring carbs. At least some things are getting simpler.

It’s a question so bizarre that someone had to put it to the test- can someone’s genes increase their chance of becoming a victim of crime, such as violence?

Researchers at Florida State University, led by Kevin M. Beaver, studied a large sample of fraternal adolescent twins to conduct their analysis. Controlling variables such as family life, social life, and drug and alcohol use, Beaver was able to point to genes as a powerful factor in the chances of an adolescent being a victim of violence.

Because genes are unlikely to change much throughout a person’s life, it stands that victims will continue to be victims so long as their behavior remains the same. This explains Beaver’s further and more powerful findings connecting genetic factors with repeat victims.

Beaver is quick to point out that victims are often not innocent targets in their victimization, but may exhibit anti-social behavior that attracts such behavior from others. Additionally, victims of repeat violence tend to associate with delinquent peers, thus increasing the chances for them to be victimized. Finally, repeat victims often become perpetrators of this type of crime themselves, thus completing the circle of victimization.

Despite the solid findings, Beaver notes that genetic factors shouldn’t be used to solely explain the phenomena of repeat victimization, as environmental factors can never be taken out of the equation. Depending on the family environment and childhood upbringing, such behavioral traits could be heightened or diminished, making any genetic disposition irrelevant.

Those in the fields of Criminology, criminal psychology and counseling psychology could use the findings of this study to better understand repeat victimization and why it occurs.

The age old question: who experiences more stress, men or women? Now, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania have a deeper understanding of gender specific stress response.

Sixteen men and women were placed in fMRI machines to have their brains scanned while asked to perform a mental subtraction task. An fMRI, or functional magnetic resonance imaging machine, is a cutting-edge medical device that is used to observe biological and chemical changes inside the body, in real-time. During the task, participants were asked to count backwards by 13, starting at a large number. This triggered a moderate stress response and allowed researchers to observe changes in their body and brains.

Monitoring blood flow to different parts of the brain and the release of cortisol, a well studied stress hormone, researchers concluded that there were clear differences between the stress response of men and women.

Men showed a classical ‘fight of flight’ response, identified by an increased blood flow to their prefrontal cortex, the area close to the forehead. Such a reaction triggers the adrenal glands, dumping adrenaline and cortisol into the bloodstream. This increases heart rate, blood pressure and breathing. Such changes assist us in taking rapid action when there is a perceived threat in the environment, but can be detrimental to our health when the response is prolonged or repeated frequently.

Women showed a higher blood flow to the emotional center of the brain, the deeply embedded limbic system. This part of the brain can produce emotions such as fear. Tests showed that the effects of stress appear to last longer in the brains of women than in men.

The research shows clear evidence that men and women respond to stress differently. This indicates that treatment for stress should be more gender specific. Men typically have a more physical response, and women,  a stronger emotional reaction. Counseling and clinical psychologists could use this information to create better tailored therapies. Health psychologists could also use this knowledge to promote awareness of the symptoms of stress and how they differ with each gender.

A recent study has found conclusive evidence that subliminal messages can be delivered and recognized under certain conditions. The study, led by Professor Nilli Lavie from UCL, showed that information of negative value is better detected than neutral or positive value. For instance, a danger warning would more likely be detected than a trivial remark about the weather.

The Study and Results

Professor Lavie and his colleagues screened a series of words, each for only a fraction of a second, with 50 participants guessing whether the words shown were of positive, neutral or negative value. The results showed that words such as pain, fear and murder were much better recognized than neutral or positive words, even though participants claimed no conscious recall of what types of words they were seeing.

How Does Subliminal Messages Work?

The findings of this study point to theories from evolutionary psychology pertaining to the benefits of being able to rapidly respond to negative information in the environment, such as detecting a dangerous predator when it is barely in sight. In such situations, detecting a faint stimulus, even on a non-conscious level, could mean the difference between life and death. Human ancestors who possessed this trait would of had increased survivability, thus propagating the trait to current day humans. In modern times, this trait has been exploited by manipulating frames in a motion picture to trigger a subconscious reaction in the viewer. Lavie’s study has shown that this technique may work with single words flashed on a screen.

How Can Subliminal Messaging Be Used?

Lavie’s study has many implications for those who wish to harness subliminal messaging. On road signs, for instance, it would be much more effective to write ‘Speed Kills’ than ‘Drive Safe’. Although drivers are unlikely to focus their attention on every sign that they pass, they may detect their meaning subliminally, on an emotional level. Those in the field of health psychology could use such messages to increase public safety without being overly intrusive.

For commercial advertising, an ad could use subliminal messages to state negative information about a competitor, as positive information about the advertiser would generally be ineffective. This brings up a torrent of ethical implications, which social scientists and policy makers are sure to explore.

Conclusion

The effectiveness of subliminal messaging has long been debated, with many critics saying that such methods of communication are practically useless; but Lavie’s breakthrough study has shown otherwise. The question now, is how such communication can be used responsibly and how to prevent misuse of subliminal messaging, especially in popular media channels such as television and the Internet. This is a domain for psychologists, ethicists and those who are involved in shaping public policy to monitor. In the mean time, it never hurts to be aware of the hidden potential of subliminal messaging, if only to remain on guard.

Traditionally, the roles of chef and food scientist have been separated. While chefs are almost always found in restaurants and other food serving locations, food scientists commonly remain in the lab, developing new products and ways to keep them preserved on store shelves. Today however, a new breed of culinary experts are being trained at top universities and colleges around the country. These food experts are known as culinologists, and what they are trained in is called culinology.

A culinologist is both an artist and a scientist. Their role is to make food safer, tastier and more nutritious, and they can be employed at all levels of the food service and production industry.

Using their knowledge of science, culinologists are keenly aware of the chemical and biological forces at work in food products. Their primary concern, in this regard, is keeping foods safely preserved and tasting great. This is no small feat, as evidenced by the steady demand for culinologists in the job market. Recently, culinologists have found work in some of the nation’s largest food manufacturers.

Aside from their scientific base, culinologists have an aesthetic appreciation for food products. At heart, culinologists are still chefs – they know that food products must be presented in an appealing fashion and taste great for them to be successful. A culinologist knows how to cook and present food for the consumer, and thus, many find themselves employed at restaurants and other food serving institutions. In this role, a culinologist doesn’t just cook, but they may also be incharge of developing new dishes, deciding the menu, and making sure the kitchen adheres to proper food safety standards.

More and more culinary schools are now offering a culinology degree program or elements of culinology in their regular culinary programs. As food products become increasingly influenced by technology, it is expected that the need for culinologists will grow exponentially.

There are many ways that people have tried to treat depression. In the past, Freudian psychotherapy has been used with debatable success, and more recently, the use of pharmacological products, which have become ubiquitous in our society. But are there ways to treat depression that are drug-free, effective and long lasting?

One method of treating depression that has been around for decades, but has remained mostly below the radar, at least in mainstream popularity, is the use of cognitive psychology. Its founder, Aaron T. Beck, developed cognitive psychology for the purpose of treating depression, although this branch of psychology has since flourished and is now associated with much more than just treating mental distress.

Beck saw that many people with depression simply had mistaken or irrational thoughts. He began to list and summarize these types of thoughts so that his patients could recognize the error in their beliefs:

• Dichotomous thinking: Seeing everything as black and white. Believing everything is either supremely good or extremely bad; there are no grey areas in life.

• Over-generalizing: Taking a single negative event and concluding that its outcome is the rule, not the exception for all other future events.

• Maximizing and Minimizing: Losing perspective by exaggerating. Believing something trivial is of the highest importance, or underestimating one’s own ability to accomplish something.

As you can see, many of us have shared these irrational thoughts from time to time; however, it is the depressive mind that chronically clings onto these beliefs, dragging its bearer into a continually stressful, gloomy world.

Fortunately, practitioners of clinical and counseling psychology have championed the techniques developed by cognitive psychologists like Beck. Many of those who have battled depression in their life can attest to the effectiveness of using such methods, which don’t rely on potentially harmful drugs.

If you or someone you know is currently suffering from depression, perhaps it’s time that you looked into cognitive psychology.

A study has shown an almost 70% correlation between individuals who ate candy on a daily basis when they were children and who were later convicted of a violent crime by their mid-30′s. The research, led by Simon Moore of Cardiff University in the U.K., has many in the field of criminal and forensic psychology intrigued.

Moore first became aware of the relation between food consumption and criminal behavior when he noted that many misbehaving children had terrible diets. Looking over data from the British Cohorts Study, which continually collects data on over 17,000 individuals born in 1970, Moore uncovered a strong correlation between candy eating and violent acts. Feeling that it was too strange to be true, Moore accounted for other suspected variables, such as socioeconomic status and parenting style, but none of these produced the same effect.

Despite the strong correlation, it’s still too early to determine causation from this study. For instance, does candy produce a chemical or biological affect in people that can cause long-term aggressive behavior? Or is that children who receive candy regularly develop poor impulse control; in other words, they never learn how to delay gratification? Moore suspects the latter, although other research points to diet as a factor.

Researchers, are still prodding further into the fascinating link between junk food and violence. Parents and other caregivers should take the findings under serious consideration, as the correlation has merit despite disputed causation.